Halloween Horror Nights 34 (UOR) - Speculation & Rumors

[Parkscope Joe]

I have a theory. What if ROF is the only multi night ticket option that has the express removed? Last year that express add on didn’t sell out till after the event started. What if?

Why? Wouldn’t you remove it from the passes with more days?

I feel ROF is used mostly by non locals, so makes sense

Wouldn’t you want to remove it from the passes for the locals? They spend less and drive up waits.

 

[srbmarc]

At the bottom it says, “A limited number of reservations will be available for each event night on a first-come, first-served basis, subject to availability.”

So I wonder if every night is able to be reserved for premier passholders?

That's what I'm thinking. I'm sure the most sought-after nights will have the lowest amount of availability, though.

 

[GentleArt309]

I have a theory. What if ROF is the only multi night ticket option that has the express removed? Last year that express add on didn’t sell out till after the event started. What if?

As someone that has only bought ROF with Express since it was available.... I would be very disappointed.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

Wouldn’t you want to remove it from the passes for the locals? They spend less and drive up waits.

I misread the statement and thought it said "NOT" removed, ooops. I don't see a reason to remove Express from ROF and would be extremely disappointed and reduce my visits

 

[UniversalRBLX]

There definitely needs to be an adjustment to how HHN handles ticketing in order to "favor" the 1-night guest, but still encourage repeat visits by locals (since it encourages additional food and merchandise sales). I still don't think the event utilizes the park efficiently, so there's still room to adjust the event before they go crazy like Disney and limit access to 1-night tickets only.

• For starters, I think express offered with multi-night tickets should be removed. (I have the same belief for the regular parks with AP Premier Passes - Sorry!)
• Over the past few years, HHN has "relocated" locals to visit during the weekday, which has at times caused weekdays to be busier than weekends.
• There are dead zones (mainly Hollywood, Central Park like last year, and all of DreamWorks) in the park that can alleviate congestion in over crowded areas like NY and Fear Factor/San Francisco.
• I'll stop here, but there's still room to grow inside the park with additional entertainment acts and experiences. Once Rockit's replacement opens up, it should also help spread crowds out as guests will have interest for the new shiny coaster.

As wild as this sounds, I don't think HHN has a capacity problem when it comes to the haunted houses themselves... they have an issue with spreading crowds out throughout the event/park. Everybody wants to do the "E-ticket" IP house, so I think the solution is to create twin versions of the same house in order to satisfy demand for it whenever a big IP is utilized or have an even amount of popular IPs (which they've done in the past - and this year will be a perfect example).

I misread the statement and thought it said "NOT" removed, ooops. I don't see a reason to remove Express from ROF and would be extremely disappointed and reduce my visits

I think if you are a frequent local, express is more of a luxury than a necessity. I'd rather they sell 1-night express passes only to reduce the number of express users, and prioritize standby guests more. I hate saying that, but I think it's fair to prioritize the 1-night guest versus locals.

 

[SeventyOne]

As wild as this sounds, I don't think HHN has a capacity problem when it comes to the haunted houses themselves... they have an issue with spreading crowds out throughout the event/park. Everybody wants to do the "E-ticket" IP house, so I think the solution is to create twin versions of the same house in order to satisfy demand for it whenever a big IP is utilized or have an even amount of popular IPs (which they've done in the past - and this year will be a perfect example).

This is actually a brilliant idea. It goes against the "cool punk rock kid" ethos of the event -- I think the design team buys into the "it's a cult classic" mythology as much as the super-fans -- but it would go a long way in improving guest satisfaction. More guests could see the headliner, and see more of the other houses as well.

I think if you are a frequent local, express is more of a luxury than a necessity. I'd rather they sell 1-night express passes only to reduce the number of express users, and prioritize standby guests more. I hate saying that, but I think it's fair to prioritize the 1-night guest versus locals.

I detest calling anything involving a theme park ticket a "necessity," but I get what you mean. And they absolutely need to prioritize single-night guests. That's the real money. And last year showed the majority of local fans will still buy FF, and show up to buy food and merch, even without an Express option.

 

[Neo]

As wild as this sounds, I don't think HHN has a capacity problem when it comes to the haunted houses themselves... they have an issue with spreading crowds out throughout the event/park. Everybody wants to do the "E-ticket" IP house, so I think the solution is to create twin versions of the same house in order to satisfy demand for it whenever a big IP is utilized or have an even amount of popular IPs (which they've done in the past - and this year will be a perfect example).

Huh? By that logic you'd think that Islands needs to build a second Hagrids? That Disney needs two 7 Dwarfs coasters? That's not a solution. That's like saying when Tickle Me Elmo is "the gift" of the year to have a second "Bickle me Belmo" to alleviate strain on the market, it doesn't work like that.

Even if it were, the forums would figure out which version has a better cast and then the whole point is moot for the people who go to the event every night of the event.

And then you have the completists, the exact people they're trying to limit who go to the event with express 20+ nights a season that just want to be able to say they did every house, introducing a duplicate house does nothing to alleviate that.

 

[Myah1220]

Huh? By that logic you'd think that Islands needs to build a second Hagrids? That Disney needs two 7 Dwarfs coasters? That's not a solution. That's like saying when Tickle Me Elmo is "the gift" of the year to have a second "Bickle me Belmo" to alleviate strain on the market, it doesn't work like that.

Even if it were, the forums would figure out which version has a better cast and then the whole point is moot for the people who go to the event every night of the event.

And then you have the completists, the exact people they're trying to limit who go to the event with express 20+ nights a season that just want to be able to say they did every house, introducing a duplicate house does nothing to alleviate that.

It's actually not that crazy to suggest because theme parks literally already do this all the time. You don't see one single roller coaster car on a roller coaster. There are multiple cars to handle capacity. An even more specific example to match what OP was saying is quite literally Dumbo. They have two Dumbo rides identical next to each other to handle capacity. I don't see Universal actually going through with this with houses but it's not that crazy of a suggestion at all.

And also the idea of duplicates is an exact copy & paste, not an original and one subpar imitation. So it wouldn't be like having Tickle Me Elmo and "Bickle Me Belmo." It would be like having two Tickle Me Elmos.

 

[Freak]

It's actually not that crazy to suggest because theme parks literally already do this all the time. You don't see one single roller coaster car on a roller coaster. There are multiple cars to handle capacity. An even more specific example to match what OP was saying is quite literally Dumbo. They have two Dumbo rides identical next to each other to handle capacity. I don't see Universal actually going through with this with houses but it's not that crazy of a suggestion at all.

Didn’t they do this like18 years ago? I think they built two mirroring houses but that flopped hard and never did it again.

 

[Jake S]

It's actually not that crazy to suggest because theme parks literally already do this all the time. You don't see one single roller coaster car on a roller coaster. There are multiple cars to handle capacity. An even more specific example to match what OP was saying is quite literally Dumbo. They have two Dumbo rides identical next to each other to handle capacity. I don't see Universal actually going through with this with houses but it's not that crazy of a suggestion at all.

And also the idea of duplicates is an exact copy & paste, not an original and one subpar imitation. So it wouldn't be like having Tickle Me Elmo and "Bickle Me Belmo." It would be like having two Tickle Me Elmos.

Yeah, I think this is true for attractions or objects that aren't fungible or experiences that guests can't discern between. The problem is that, as Neo said, guests would probably decide one of the two houses is better and either prioritize that or, worse, try to do both. If there was a way to build two houses with a single entrance and have guests unaware there were two experiences... maybe that could work? But it's the difference between building two McDonald's next two one another vs. having one McDonald's with two kitchens.

 

[Clive]

Yeah, I think this is true for attractions or objects that aren't fungible or experiences that guests can't discern between. The problem is that, as Neo said, guests would probably decide one of the two houses is better and either prioritize that or, worse, try to do both. If there was a way to build two houses with a single entrance and have guests unaware there were two experiences... maybe that could work? But it's the difference between building two McDonald's next two one another vs. having one McDonald's with two kitchens.

You'd also inevitably start to hear which "side" is better - and one inevitably would be - creating a new kind of conflict if guests don't get to make the choice themselves.

 

[Jake S]

You'd also inevitably start to hear which "side" is better - and one inevitably would be - creating a new kind of conflict if guests don't get to make the choice themselves.

It's basically the "problem" with the Matterhorn at Disneyland.

 

[Myah1220]

Yeah, I think this is true for attractions or objects that aren't fungible or experiences that guests can't discern between. The problem is that, as Neo said, guests would probably decide one of the two houses is better and either prioritize that or, worse, try to do both. If there was a way to build two houses with a single entrance and have guests unaware there were two experiences... maybe that could work? But it's the difference between building two McDonald's next two one another vs. having one McDonald's with two kitchens.

I can see what you're saying.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

Huh? By that logic you'd think that Islands needs to build a second Hagrids? That Disney needs two 7 Dwarfs coasters? That's not a solution. That's like saying when Tickle Me Elmo is "the gift" of the year to have a second "Bickle me Belmo" to alleviate strain on the market, it doesn't work like that.

Even if it were, the forums would figure out which version has a better cast and then the whole point is moot for the people who go to the event every night of the event.

And then you have the completists, the exact people they're trying to limit who go to the event with express 20+ nights a season that just want to be able to say they did every house, introducing a duplicate house does nothing to alleviate that.

No, unlike regular park ops, there's more of a desire to do the e-ticket IP on your visit since you really only have 1 chance at doing it. HHN houses come and go each year, so the need/requirement to do a house is higher than a theme park ride you can visit next time.

This idea of a high-capacity haunted house only came to me after realizing that even though the event has gotten busier attendance wise, the original houses are relatively still unpopular (compared to the IP houses). Typical to see a lot of the originals die down randomly throughout the event as guests prioritize the IPs. Not saying they should do this to all IP houses, but I'd think it'd be well received if at least one IP house is guaranteed a minimal wait with higher throughput.

I'm not sure if its the right answer, but I really don't think HHN needs an 11th or 12th house. I'd love to see them try other things before going down that route. HNF is at capacity each showing, etc.

Yeah, I think this is true for attractions or objects that aren't fungible or experiences that guests can't discern between. The problem is that, as Neo said, guests would probably decide one of the two houses is better and either prioritize that or, worse, try to do both. If there was a way to build two houses with a single entrance and have guests unaware there were two experiences... maybe that could work? But it's the difference between building two McDonald's next two one another vs. having one McDonald's with two kitchens.

The idea is you stick mirror versions of the same house in the same building, have a TM split the queue at the front. Not every IP warrants such an idea... but Stranger Things would have benefited from it IMO.

I don't think having the same IP/original split into two different house concepts works though, I think that causes more issues.

 

[Chumpieboy]

They need a third option for frequent tickets - out of town guests staying onsite. Give me the equivalent of ROF+EP only for the days I’m in town that’s reasonably priced but much less than the equivalent number of single days tickets + EP.

It's actually not that crazy to suggest because theme parks literally already do this all the time. You don't see one single roller coaster car on a roller coaster. There are multiple cars to handle capacity. An even more specific example to match what OP was saying is quite literally Dumbo. They have two Dumbo rides identical next to each other to handle capacity. I don't see Universal actually going through with this with houses but it's not that crazy of a suggestion at all.

And also the idea of duplicates is an exact copy & paste, not an original and one subpar imitation. So it wouldn't be like having Tickle Me Elmo and "Bickle Me Belmo." It would be like having two Tickle Me Elmos.

Yup. Space Mountain is another example. Plus the many rides that had either multiple preshow rooms or multiple theaters - it’s the same concept as what is being suggested. Have one queue that splits up at the end of the line and you could be randomly pointed to one or the other copy of the house. Rotate the casts between the two houses and it’s a workable solution in theory.

 

[Clive]

Again: from a resource and practicality perspective, this isn't feasible. You would essentially have an eleventh house (no pun intended given the Stranger Things example). It's a nice idea on paper, but there's a reason they only tried it once.

 

[Freak]

Would I COULD *maybe* see is a dual-run house like they did for Frigantic (?) back in the 90’s. That’s what I originally thought they were going to do with Dueling Dragons back when that was rumored. A little far-fetched and maybe a little confusing for the GP but still more feasible than just building a mirror copy of the same house.

 

[Lucky Planet]

Those bathrooms are already packed enough during the event, lol

I always feel so bad for the janitors are hhn.
that's the true terror at the park. more than any other time.

Didn’t they do this like18 years ago? I think they built two mirroring houses but that flopped hard and never did it again.

what house was that

 

[Tereglith]

I assume everyone's theoretical "crowding solution" with FFP is the one that most favors their visiting style, but in that self-serving vein I really wouldn't mind if the current FFP model was replaced by a "X nights ticket" where you can pick and choose your nights to visit throughout the season (with a reservation system if necessary). So instead of ROF/FFP/FFP+/UFFP it would be, at similar price points, more like 3 nights/5 nights/7 nights/Every Night (very, very expensive) to be used whenever you want throughout the event

This would suit three types of guests who are currently incentivized to buy some tier of FFP:

• People who live just far enough away in the outlying areas of the Orlando metro that it's not practical to visit more than a few times per season (this is me, 50 minute drive, I make it out 5-7 times per year but can't swing it on weeknights)
• Locals who want to visit more than twice, perhaps with different friend groups, but have busy schedules so don't need the optionality to attend every night.
• People who visit from out of state specifically for HHN and stay in a hotel for a few days or a week to hit the event multiple times, and whose current most economical option is buying a full FFP even though they're only trying to visit in a very narrow window (I get the impression there are a lot of people in this bucket on this board)

On the other hand, it would heavily disfavor ultra-frequent visitors who have Universal in their back yard and hang out there every night.

As it stands, I'm paying my $300 and going five to seven nights, while someone who lives next door pays the same $300 and goes for 40 nights. It doesn't take a ton of lifestylers like this to get a pareto distribution where a small percentage of guests are making up an outsize percentage of guest-hours without Universal necessarily making any more money from them.

With the way they're slowly ramping up the presence of Park Pass style nightly reservations, I wouldn't be surprised if something like this is the ultimate plan in the next few years. I'm sure it would cause great hue and cry amongst the core fan base, but if it improved the guest experience I'd selfishly be for it.

 

[Legacy]

You'd also inevitably start to hear which "side" is better - and one inevitably would be - creating a new kind of conflict if guests don't get to make the choice themselves.

They already do it with casts. Fans already determine which cast is stronger and develop preferences based on how specific performers engage.

Universal built a “duplicate” house in 2005 with “Where Evil Hides.” The houses were direct mirrors of each other from a single queue, and were designed to increase capacity. However, the congo line method of sending guests through houses made it unnecessary. As a result, they rarely used the second build. They realized the queue largely informs a house’s capacity. It’s not the house itself.

A “dual-run” is a compelling idea, at least in its purest form—a single queue feeding two completely different houses (Dueling Dragons I don’t consider a dual run as it is mostly one house just with different concluding scenes). However, a dual-run suffers from the same logistical challenge as a mirror-build… the queue. It’s actually more feasible to add a whole new (different) house because mow you can actually disperse people throughout a new queue.